War—you see in a war soldiers produce nothing, but they consume and destroy vast quantities of many things. Thus soldiers in war create a larger market—though they create nothing whatever for that market. This is fine for those capitalists whose puny souls can hope and plan for nothing higher than more markets—and thus have more opportunity to sweat more wage-earners simply in order to make more profits. Funerals look good to the coffin trust and the undertaker, and war looks good to the capitalist class. War—PREPARATION for war on the huge scale of the present day—furnishes a market for an enormous amount of commodities for sale by the capitalist class, such as steel, clothing, leather products, lumber, food products, horses, and the like. True, these things are worse than wasted; but just as the capitalist class are willing to destroy part of the coffee crop—in Brazil, for example—in order to keep up the price for profit’s sake, so also are the capitalist class willing to fan the flames of war and urge “preparation for war,” vast and senseless “preparation for war,” in order to have a market into which to dump at a profit immense stores of commodities. “There is money in it.” War is a means of opening up or protecting, for modern capitalistic exploitation, new territory, such as Egypt, Algeria, Madagascar, South Africa, India, Alaska, The Philippines, Borneo, Hawaii, Cuba, Porto Rico, China, Korea. United States Senator A. J. Beveredge puts the matter thus:[13] “Every progressive nation in Europe today is seeking new lands to colonize and governments to administer.” [Illustration: CITIZENS WHO ARE LED: “WE _fight_ THE WARS”] J. H. Rose:[14] “In short, the crystallization of national existence at home has necessitated the eager exploitation of new lands which forms so noteworthy a feature of the life of today.” Thus John Jay:[15] “It is too true, however disgraceful it may be to human nature, that nations will make war whenever they have a prospect of getting anything by it.” Alexander Hamilton sneers thus at the windy blood-for-profit statesmen:[16] “Has commerce hitherto done anything more than change the objects of war? Is not the love of wealth as domineering and enterprising a passion as that of power or glory? Have not there been as many wars founded upon commercial motives since that has become the prevailing system of nations as were before occasioned by the cupidity of territory or dominion? Has not the spirit of commerce, in many instances, administered new incentives to the appetite, both for the one and for the other?” Professor Simon N. Patten (University of Pennsylvania) states the case bluntly:[17] “Most nations have been formed by conquest, and have therefore started with a dominant and a subject class. The former seize the surplus, and force the latter to work for a bare minimum.” The New York _World_ is commendably frank concerning this matter:[18]